2015 Fleet Service thread

Kev3188 said:
I know the story, thanks.
If the Hoover dam gets dynamited, and I live down river, anything that stops any amount of water will be appealing... That doesn't change the fact that the dam was destroyed in the first place, nor does one need the back story on its construction to realize that...
Oh and the backstory on that Frick Dam and how it was built is absolutely a necessary part of the story of why it collapsed and all of those people downriver perished.
 
Tim Nelson said:
Your version of things is inaccurate. Both ramp groups at United had a contract and they should have built upon it instead of taking on concessions. 
 
The CWA did a much better job of getting scope for all 80 stations that have 5 or more flights, even though the majority of its members were non contract. In fact, the ta the iam 141 just ratified at United is their second contract and has only 28 stations and gets the rotten rasberry award.
 
regards,
The IBT was only able to build a very weak contract out of nothing but air that they were given and you know this.

But as 700 says "Don't let the facts get in your way"

And this is AA Fleet here on this Forums the last time I checked? Isn't it?

regards,
 
WeAAsles said:
The IBT was only able to build a very weak contract out of nothing but air that they were given and you know this.

But as 700 says "Don't let the facts get in your way"

And this is AA Fleet here on this Forums the last time I checked? Isn't it?

regards,
Maybe it should be moved to one of the generic pages, then?

C'mon, man...
 
Tim Nelson said:
Your version of things is inaccurate. Both ramp groups at United had a contract and they should have built upon it instead of taking on concessions. 
 
The CWA did a much better job of getting scope for all 80 stations that have 5 or more flights, even though the majority of its members were non contract. In fact, the ta the iam 141 just ratified at United is their second contract and has only 28 stations and gets the rotten rasberry award.
 
regards,
I seem to recall UAL language requiring any station with year-round mainline service to be staffed accordingly.

Now I watch 'Bus after 'bus come in to the gates next to mine being worked by DGS...
 
WeAAsles said:
Well at least as far as Fleet is concerned, that's it. SWA and UAL are now locked in and I don't believe that DL will offer any more wage improvements until the ramp and maintenance at AA lock in as well? At least I doubt it.

What I don't like obviously is this "supposed" Parker comment of him backpedaling again on the whoever plus line. First it was plus 7, then plus 3, now what?

Uh uh, sorry. No way Jose. The 3% above is fine with the addition of PS but if the intention now is just to equal the UAL rate we're back to "sub-par" once again.

Again the back end (retirement) is weak in comparison to our counterparts. Make up for that shortfall I say and we got a deal.

regards,
Why not go and listen to Parker's "supposed" comment if you have any doubts.
It's right there on Jetnet for all to hear.
 
Kev3188 said:
I seem to recall UAL language requiring any station with year-round mainline service to be staffed accordingly.

Now I watch 'Bus after 'bus come in to the gates next to mine being worked by DGS...
That was UAL as a standalone entity you were watching. A group that had a Union and a contract to bring in to the merger.

When the UAL peeps entered into a marriage with the Co peeps, one side brought all their debts with them and unfortunately those debts needed to be paid.

"No Union, No Contract, 30 Years"
 
AANOTOK said:
Why not go and listen to Parker's "supposed" comment if you have any doubts.
It's right there on Jetnet for all to hear.
I pretty much avoid those things now since I was the recipient of the BS on our Match. 

So he did say it then huh?

Sorry Doug. No way Jose then. No deal.
 
WeAAsles said:
The IBT was only able to build a very weak contract out of nothing but air that they were given and you know this.

But as 700 says "Don't let the facts get in your way"

And this is AA Fleet here on this Forums the last time I checked? Isn't it?

regards,
yes it is aa fleet but other labor contracts in this industry impact ours. Your other personality recognizes this and it has been central to his argument regarding our present predicament.
 
At any rate, the cwa at american did so much better with securing scope at 80+ stations, and FT protections at dos, as opposed to the iam 28 stations and FT protections only older than April 1999.
 
We are in position to secure the best contract in the industry and it appears that our 2 unions are taking their time to do that.
 
regards,
 
Kev3188 said:
I seem to recall UAL language requiring any station with year-round mainline service to be staffed accordingly.

Now I watch 'Bus after 'bus come in to the gates next to mine being worked by DGS...
you are correct. as long as they had 1 mainline. free healthcare, 30% pt cap. lead scale, etc. a real hatchet job by Klemm who was 1 of 4 signers. 
 
regards, 
 
WeAAsles said:
I pretty much avoid those things now since I was the recipient of the BS on our Match. 

So he did say it then huh?

Sorry Doug. No way Jose then. No deal.
 To me he didn't jump up and say UA +3% like the other times yet he really didn't say no. Sounded to me it had to be negotiated. I interpreted without prejudice or an ax to grind 
 
WeAAsles said:
I pretty much avoid those things now since I was the recipient of the BS on our Match. 

So he did say it then huh?

Sorry Doug. No way Jose then. No deal.
Yes he did, and this is actually why I have decided to give the negotiating committee the benefit of the doubt and realize these will be drawn out for some time. If Parker can publicly make that statement, tip his hand on outsourcing, lie about the match, and who knows what else we HAVEN'T heard, then you know the carrots at the end of those strings are rotten.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top